Letters: How to reform the GMC

Overhaul the GMC

Sir: Max Pemberton’s cogent criticism of the GMC (‘Unfit for purpose’, 20 August). is one of the more nuanced and on the nose of those that I have read. A client of mine was reprimanded and subjected to a fitness-to-practise investigation after an attempted suicide following a financial crisis. The experience worsened his mental health, which then prolonged the investigation. Other clients have been forced to sell their homes or relocate.

Some initial steps I implore the GMC to take include limiting the length of investigations, improving mental health reporting, providing more support for doctors about fitness-to-practise issues, and overhauling how evidence is handled.

Deepika Raino

Director and head of healthcare regulation, Adkirk Law, Leeds

An inspiring surgeon

Sir: Reading Max Pemberton’s article concerning the GMC, I came to the last paragraphs about Omer Karim. I met him a decade ago in my role as chairman of the Thames Valley cancer patients group in a meeting with cancer surgeons. He was an inspiring figure advocating robotic surgery when the technique was in its infancy. He was greeted with scepticism by other surgeons, who seemed indifferent and even hostile to his enthusiasm. I supported his approach but as a patient I was ignored.

I am not surprised that he has crossed the GMC based upon the attitude of the other surgeons, who regarded technical innovation as a threat to their own skillset. Omer prophesied that robot-assisted surgery would be the norm within a decade. He invited me to witness a robot-assisted prostatectomy and I saw at first hand his inspiring leadership. The NHS bureaucracy has had its revenge on an innovative and pioneering surgeon.

W.R. Savage